Second Amendment, Right to Bear Arms; An Update

For those of you who are concerned about your Second Amendment right to bear arms, several important cases have been in the news lately: Nationally: The U.S. Supreme Court, in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. City of N.Y. (Apr. 27, 2020) __ U.S. __ [140 S. Ct. 1525; 206 L.Ed.2nd 798], wimped out, dismissing as “moot” a challenge to a State of New York statute and a City of New York ordinance, both of which prohibited the transporting of firearms outside the City of New York. No doubt seeing enforcement of these laws as a losing cause from a constitutional standpoint, both the State and the City amended their respective statutes to eliminate these restrictions. The U.S. Supreme Court, therefore, ruled that plaintiffs had already “received the outcome they desired from their lawsuit after the State of New York amended its firearm licensing statute when the City of New York amended the rule to allow permitted persons to lawfully transport firearms to a second home or shooting range outside of the city.” So, that’s the end of that issue. The Ninth Circuit and California: Federal Senior District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez ruled on April 23rd that California’s background check requirement as a prerequisite to purchasing ammunition violated the Second Amendment, and was thus unconstitutional. (See Rhode v. Becerra (S.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2020) __ F.Supp.3rd __ [2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71893]; the so-called “Safety for All Act of 2016” (Prop. 63); and P.C. §§ 30312, 30314, 30352, 30370, as amended.) Per Justice Benitez: “The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted. California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured.” However, the Ninth Circuit, apparently not impressed with Justice Benitez’s clever rhetoric, immediately stayed this ruling pending review, putting this decision on hold. Senior Judge Benitez is the same judge that ruled in 2019 that California’s ban on large capacity magazines (Pen. Code § 32310) violated the Second Amendment (see Duncan v. Becerra (S.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2019) 366 F.Supp.3rd 1131.); a ruling that is also on appeal to the Ninth Circuit with an upset Gov. Gavin Newsom and Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra vigorously seeking a reversal. The Ninth Circuit and Hawaii: Also pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal is the case of Young v. Hawaii (2018) 896 ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.